Greater N.E.A. Voice for Support Personnel, College Faculty Urged

Miami Beach--Paraprofessionals and college educators and support
personnel should have a greater voice in the governance of the National
Education Association, an interim report prepared by a special
organizational committee of the union has proposed.

The report, released here this month at the association's annual
convention, calls for guaranteeing representation for the minority
constituencies on the n.e.a. executive committee.

The "streamlining" committee has not yet decided, however, whether
to recommend accommodating the guaranteed slots among the current
nine-member executive committee or expanding the body. In the former
scenario, one seat each would be set aside for a representative from
precollegiate instructional staff, support staff, and higher-education
faculty.

Support personnel, higher-education professionals, and other
minority constituencies also could increase their representation on the
Representative Assembly, the union's massive legislative body, if the
committee's proposals are adopted.

Currently, some state associations count national members toward
their delegate allocations to the assembly even if those members do not
belong to the state association. The streamlining committee proposes
that such members, many of whom are paraprofessionals, be entitled to
run for delegate slots.

The streamlining committee was created in December 1989 in part to
deal with the union's increasingly diverse membership.

While educational-support staff and higher-education faculty are
considered to be the most promising areas for union growth, leaders are
concerned that growth could be stunted unless a better balance is
struck between the traditional dominance of elementary and secondary
classroom teachers and the influence of other constituencies.

The streamlining committee's final report is due to the board of
directors next February and to the Representative Assembly in July.
But, given the union's lengthy and complex procedural rules, any
initiative requiring action by the Assembly is not expected to occur
before July 1993.

Modified Dues Structure

Although educational-support personnel would make some strides under
the committee's proposals, they would pay a price.

The panel tentatively recommended a modified dues structure that
would base charges on salary rather than job classification. The change
would directly affect only dues paid to the national organization.

Currently, support staff pay half the dues paid by instructional
staff. Under the new plan, however, all active members earning $24,000
or more annually in base pay would pay full dues. Members earning
$18,000 to $23,999 would pay 75 percent, while those earning less than
$18,000 would pay half. The salary schedule would be revised
periodically.

"There are support-staff members who make more than beginning
teachers," said Robert F. Chase, the union's vice president and
chairman of the streamlining committee. "We are looking for a way to
have some equity."

As the report points out, though, the state associations receive the
lion's share of members' dues. Consequently, "changes in the n.e.a.
dues structure would not in and of themselves have significant
financial impact" unless they cause a ripple effect, the report
notes.

The report also calls for enlarging the pool of eligible members.
Employees of state education departments, for example, would be
eligible for active membership, as would those who work for private
higher-education institutions and all those whose primary function is
to teach--whether in public schools, prisons, or mental hospitals.

Healing a 'Sore Point'

While embracing a broader membership base, the panel also sought to
heal what the report refers to as a "sore point" between the national
union and its state affiliates.

Under the committee's proposals, the national organization would no
longer accept members who are ineligible for state membership, nor
would it affiliate a local unless it was made up predominantly of
workers who were eligible for state membership.

Such a policy, however, would not prevent the national body from
affiliating locals. For instance, if the state union was uninterested
in organizing higher-education faculty, the national organization could
do so as long as the state recognized such members.

In large measure the action stems from the national body's inability
to provide adequately all the services the state affiliate ordinarily
offers. Despite acknowledging the national organization's limitations,
the streamlining committee could not reach a consensus on how to serve
the n.e.a.'s approximately 30,000 active members who are not also
members of a state affiliate. The panel did, however, reject the idea
of forming a separate national affiliate for educational-support
personnel and higher-education faculty.

For logistical and cost purposes, the committee suggested capping
the Representative Assembly at 10,000 delegates. Given the size of the
annual convention, site selection is already limited, and officials
fear that, if it grows larger, the union's choice of cities will shrink
substantially.

One provision put forward by the streamlining panel was also
approved by delegates to the convention this month. It amended the
constitution to change terms of office for executive officers from
three two-year terms to two three-year terms. The terms are in line
with those of other executive-board members.

As a result, Keith B. Geiger, the union's president, and Mr. Chase,
who were unchallenged in their bids for their second two-year terms,
would be the only president and vice president of the union to hold
those offices for seven years if they choose to run again and are
victorious.

Merger Debate Avoided

The n.e.a. averted what one official predicted would have been a
"blood bath" when a delegate from California withdrew a proposal
coupling the union and the American Federation of Teachers in several
ventures.

Under the plan, the smaller union affiliate in a school district
with collective bargaining would have been absorbed by the larger
union. Furthermore, the measure called for a moratorium on raiding each
others' locals.

Another provision urged that the two national unions launch a joint
organizing campaign across the South to win collective-bargaining
rights.

The delegate, Ben Visnick, said in withdrawing the measure that he
had not been aware that the items were under discussion by the board of
directors. (See Education Week, Jan. 9, 1991.)

National, state, and regional leaders worked behind the scenes to
per8suade Mr. Visnick to drop his new business item. National officials
feared its defeat by the Representative Assembly would have soured the
flourishing relationship between the n.e.a. and the a.f.t.

"It's too early for us to have that discussion [among delegates] at
the national level," Mr. Geiger said.

An a.f.t. official also said putting the measure to a floor vote
would have been premature.

In his speech to the convention, Mr. Geiger called for a "bill of
rights for children," which he said he would send to President Bush and
the Congress.

The five rights he outlined are: "plentiful and nutritional food";
"medical attention to any child in need"; "the basic security of a
place to live"; "a quality education"; and a government that safeguards
children from abuse, violence, and discrimination.

The rights, Mr. Geiger said, were consistent with the national
education goals set by Mr. Bush and the governors, which state that, by
the year 2000, every child will begin school physically, emotionally,
and academically ready to learn.

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.